Metaphorically speaking, America’s Founding Fathers are turning over in their graves.

They knew the danger of unreasonable searches and seizures by arms of the government. For that reason they added the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, giving Americans protection from law enforcement excesses.

With advances in science and technology, the country now finds itself wrestling with the definition of such excesses, whether they overreach into individuals’ expectations of privacy, or whether they are useful tools that protect society from criminals and other evildoers.

Such is the case of police collecting DNA samples with a simple, painless swab inside a person’s mouth.

It sounds so harmless. But it is not.

For those charged with certain crimes, DNA collection has been the practice in North Carolina since 2011 when a new law made it a requirement.

Refuse to open up and, guilty or not, you cannot get out of jail on bond.

Get swabbed and, guilty or not, your DNA profile goes into a state and federal database for possible linking to other crimes. No probable cause is required.

The 5-4 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court reinforces the practice. Justice Anthony Kennedy, echoing Sheriff Alan Cloninger and other supporters of DNA swabbing, likened it to fingerprinting.

The Supreme Court ruling dealt with a law in Maryland which, like North Carolina, requires that the DNA samples be destroyed if the suspect is found innocent.

That’s a mighty high level of trust in government given what we are learning daily about intrusion into the private lives of every American.

While it might seem reasonable to check defendants for possible ties to other crimes, collecting DNA without any known connection opens up the possibility of endless opportunities for abuse.

Ill-intentioned officers can make arrests simply to obtain one’s DNA. And once it is collected and stores in a government database, it can be used for totally unrelated purposes.

That may seem far-fetched today, but what about the future when science and technology advance even further?

When there is no probable cause to tie a person to crimes other than those for which they have been arrested, a cornerstone of our freedom has been destroyed.

Justice Antonin Scalia, writing on behalf of the four justices opposing DNA collection from persons accused but not convicted, had this to say:

“The Fourth Amendment forbids searching a person for evidence of a crime where there is no basis for believing the person is guilty of the crime or is in the possession of incriminating evidence. That prohibition is categorical and without exception; it lies at the heart of the Fourth Amendment.”

The practice of collecting DNA samples for those arrested but not convicted and using it for possible linkage to other crimes creates a more slippery slope for government excess and invasion of one’s privacy.

The Founding Fathers understood that danger. Justice Scalia is right. The Fourth Amendment has now been violated with the blessing of the United States Supreme Court.